I have the following setup:

  • Two publication targets -Staging xpm and Staging
  • Single publication -P1
  • Single deployer -D1
  • Single web server -W1
  • Databases -DB1 and DB2

I would like to publish items from P1 through "Staging xpm" target, over deployer D1 to database DB1 and to folder on W1 c:\xpm-website\

At the same time, I would like to publish items from same publication P1, through "Staging" target, using same deployer D1 to database D2 and folder on W1 c:\website\

In other words, I would like to configure storage layer to behave differently based on Publication target used. Is this possible without some sort of storage extension?

I am aware that I can create additional publications to inherit my publication and use pub id storage configuration, but this is not the approach I can use.

4 Answers 4


No. The deployer isn't aware of what type of target is being used; so it won't be able to behave differently. You would need a second deployer.

That being said, why are you trying to make such a setup? What are you trying to achieve?

  • I am assessing the option of having XPM enabled website and non XPM website on the same server. Jun 17, 2015 at 14:10
  • In that case, you'll simply need a second deployer to make it work. In general, each publishing target should have at least one deployer installation. Jun 17, 2015 at 14:21
  • @user3760419 is your intent to avoid sending the xpm tags along with your rendered content to the non-xpm site? Jun 17, 2015 at 14:29
  • @Vipin, yes, that is the plan Jun 18, 2015 at 9:16

Since, this is not supported OOB, any solution approach that you are going to come up with is going to be hacky solution which will most probably cause some unwarranted issue in future. That being said, I am not sure if there is a solution though, since you want separate content on both brokers with and without xpm (which rules out some automatic replication/deployment options).

Please consider to spin up a second deployer. You can also setup 2 deployers on the same server as well, in case you just wish to avoid setting up new infrastructure for this.


Not suggesting it's the best solution but we have a similar setup for one of our websites: One deployer is used to push content out to multiple environments from one publication. That side of things is not my field of expertise, but I believe we have multiple folders set up on the deployment server that the different publication targets publish to and then have a secondary process that moves the published content to the different environments based on the folder name. I should add that this is only used for our test environments and not for production.


There are two approaches that can be used:

  1. As suggested by @Rogier - use second deployer to make it work so that one deployer will handle deployment for non-xpm web site and other deployer for xpm web site.
  2. If you still want to use one deployer and achieve this, then option is to use database replication and file server replication. i.e. Deployer deploys on one database and file server then replication takes care of moving it to other database and file server.

One question that I am curious is, why one deployer and not two deployers? Is there any use case for the same?

Update based on details on in comments:

Due to clarifications provided in comment, the above mentioned approaches will not work. Still there are two other approaches that can be used:

  1. Hacky way: For non-xpm site, use odata instead of using content delivery JARs, that way site will ignore xpm tags as comments. In this case, you don't need two deployers and not even two databases. One database and one deployer will work.
  2. Non-hacky way: You will have to create two targets which will correspond to individual deployer. One target for xpm site and one for non-xpm site and then in TBB, you will have put logic based on target to filter out xpm tags for non-xpm target. In this case you will need two deployers and two databases.
  • 1. Yes, second deployer is out of the box solution, but as we have a lot of deployer/storage extensions (that are still in testing) I would prefer to stick with single deployer if possible. 2. I can not use replication as content on DB and on file system should be different (with and without xpm tags) Jun 18, 2015 at 9:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.